Copyright:
To give adequate notice under the DMCA, a copyright holder must give notice of which copyrights were infringed, who infringed them, and when they were infringed.

Opinion (O’Scannlain): Ludvarts, LLC, a California-based purveyor of mobile multimedia content, filed suit against AT&T Mobility, LLC (“AT&T”) and other mobile carriers alleging that they induced infringement. Ludvarts created and sold various copyrighted content that it distributed through AT&T’s MMS networks. Each MMS message contained a copyright warning, warning the MMS purchaser not to forward the MMS. Because there was no mechanism preventing MMS purchasers from forwarding the messages, many of the purchasers infringed Ludvarts’s copyrights. Ludvarts warned AT&T via mail of these infringements. Ludvarts later filed suit, alleging that because AT&T provided no mechanism for preventing infringement they in fact induced the infringement, or committed it vicariously. AT&T motioned for dismissal, and the district court granted it. Ludvarts appealed. The Court of Appeals found that AT&T was not willfully blind of the infringement, because Ludvarts could not sufficiently allege that AT&T avoided acquiring knowledge of the infringement. The notices Ludvarts sent to AT&T did not give AT&T sufficient notice under the DMCA as to which copyrights were infringed, who infringed them, or when they were infringed. Thus, AT&T could not have committed contributory infringement. Because that prong of the infringement analysis could not be met, the Court did not need to broach the inducement argument. The Court AFFIRMED judgment.